Jack Slack: An almost-complete Georges St-Pierre striking primer

Randy Marsh

Randy Marsh

by armbar
@Silver
Joined
May 23, 2010
Messages
11,925
Reaction score
44
Thought this article deserved a thread in light of GSP's upcoming fight against Johny Hendricks this Saturday.


The common misconception is that St-Pierre fails to finish fights because he is a safe fighter. In terms of his style he is certainly not one to take any outlandish risks, but at the same time he is one of the most offensive fighters in MMA. There is rarely a moment in a St-Pierre fight when he isn
Click to expand...
 
Cheers man. B/R MMA used to employ him and his breakdowns are really fun and informative.
 
Thanks for this. Great breakdown as always by Jack Slack.
 
Jack Slack lost all credibility when he showed his bias.

Analyzing Anderson's striking while discrediting his opponents, then analyzing Fedor's striking and talking up his win over Zulu.
 
Redhawks100 said:
Jack Slack lost all credibility when he showed his bias.

Analyzing Anderson's striking while discrediting his opponents, then analyzing Fedor's striking and talking up his win over Zulu.
Click to expand...

jack slack called weidman's route to victory against anderson (doubling up on the jab)
 
His springing jab is my favorite strike. I love the way he sets it up, sometimes he will feint a takedown and spring the jab.
 
Redhawks100 said:
Jack Slack lost all credibility when he showed his bias.

Analyzing Anderson's striking while discrediting his opponents, then analyzing Fedor's striking and talking up his win over Zulu.
Click to expand...

Just take it for what it is, one man's (who doesn't disclose his credentials) opinion. I think he has some valuable insights here and there. Other times, not so much (and I've heard him make claims about old boxers that are blatantly untrue when he was comparing Gene Tunney to a current fighter, I think it was Machida). Still, it at least starts a much more substantive and interesting conversation than the lion-share of what goes on in the heavies.
 
Alexandergreat3 said:
Stopped reading where it says GSP isn't a safe fighter.
Click to expand...

I do believe GSP plays it safe by always employing an intelligent game plan and having an overall high fight IQ. And at that level, I don't see a problem with that. In fact, that should be the standard when fighting at the highest level. But I think the writer was referring more on the fact that critics always try to label him as a staller or an inactive fighter, when in fact, GSP is one of the most active offensive fighters in the game. He just doesn't go for broke, exposing himself, like a backyard brawler would in Alabama.

And I'm not even a huge fan but I respect the fuck outta his work ethic and overall philosophies, in and outside of the Octagon.
 
Redhawks100 said:
Jack Slack lost all credibility when he showed his bias.

Analyzing Anderson's striking while discrediting his opponents, then analyzing Fedor's striking and talking up his win over Zulu.
Click to expand...

Redhawks100 lost all credibility after his first post when he showed his bias.

Always trolling and ignoring any fact by other Redhawks always has is head up his arse.
 
Randy Marsh said:
I do believe GSP plays it safe by always employing an intelligent game plan and having an overall high fight IQ. And at that level, I don't see a problem with that. In fact, that should be the standard when fighting at the highest level. But I think the writer was referring more on the fact that critics always try to label him as a staller or an inactive fighter, when in fact, GSP is one of the most active offensive fighters in the game. He just doesn't go for broke, exposing himself, like a backyard brawler would in Alabama.

And I'm not even a huge fan but I respect the fuck outta his work ethic and overall philosophies, in and outside of the Octagon.
Click to expand...

GSP is a very intelligent fighter, no doubt about it. If it weren't for his safety-first approach, he probably wouldn't have last this long as a champion.

But with that said, GSP's style since his loss to Serra has been safety-first. To suggest otherwise, as was done in this article, would be like trying to persuade readers into believing in something that isn't true.
 
In regards to the safe fighting thing. George is always the one on the offensive, always bringing the fight. To me it seems more like he's just fighting smart, not getting hit, and taking no real big risks, but he still fighting and putting in a show. If he wanted to, he could take down anyone and just hold them there for 25 minutes and there would be almost nothing they could do about it. He could fight much safer than he does and win, IMO

And great article btw, read it earlier.
 
Alexandergreat3 said:
GSP is a very intelligent fighter, no doubt about it. If it weren't for his safety-first approach, he probably wouldn't have last this long as a champion.

But with that said, GSP's style since his loss to Serra has been safety-first. To suggest otherwise, as was done in this article, would be like trying to persuade readers into believing in something that isn't true.
Click to expand...

I'm surprised you could even READ the article, you obviously didn't understand it. Jack is talking about people claiming GSP being a defensive, stalling type of fighter. As Barnett describes "someone just trying to hold you."

GSP's best form of defence is his constant offensive, as Slack mentions always attacking and keeping his opponent on the back foot. Or would you say Slack's claims (that GSP is not always on the offensive and attacking) is trying to convince people something that is not true.

Sorry, watch a GSP fight and you will see that it is true...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,280,886
Messages
58,325,600
Members
176,001
Latest member
Markooz86

Share this page

Back
Top